(Courtesy of PeopleTree.co.uk)

Emma Watson strikes us as the type of intelligent, thoughtful actress who really considers the impact her fashion choices can have on her young fans. So we are pleased to see this open letter on fair-trade brand People Tree’s website posted by the Harry Potter star, following a summer trip to Bangladesh with People Tree founder Safia Minney:

The contrast between the slums in Dhaka (the capital of Bangladesh) where the people who work in the garment factories live and Swallows (the Fair Trade community supported by People Tree) was all too apparent. …

I cannot imagine how I would have the mental ability and strength to go into the garment factories in the slums everyday and have my children living six hundred miles away.

We interviewed a woman in the slum in Dhaka. She was very candid about the fact that there just wasn’t any hope for her. There is no hope for anyone living in those conditions and being paid that kind of wage. Coming to Swallows I see that there is an alternative.

The living conditions are modest but it’s clean and there is a real sense of community, their families are together and they seem to love and be proud of what they are doing – many things that we in the West take for granted.

Swallows is special and I need to believe for my own peace of mind that there will be more places like this in the developing countries in the world.

The whole interview is worth reading for its candid look at the benefits fair-trade manufacturing offers workers, and it concludes with a video of Ms. Watson touring Bangladesh and modeling People Tree’s fall collection.

(Courtesy of LoveAndCasinoWar.com)

As fashion’s heaviest hitters duke it out over intellectual property and design copyrights, fast fashion and streamlined manufacturing in Asia have made it easier than ever to translate trends into retail in record time. Sometimes it’s legal, sometimes it’s not. But in any case, is it ethical?

In this issue, we take a look at the reasons counterfeit goods have gone mainstream and when you should just say no to knockoffs:

• Is there really nothing new under the sun anymore? We ponder why knockoffs have become so prevalent.
• Evolutionary psychologist Geoffrey Miller makes the case that we are biologically hardwired to seek out status symbols — and whether they are authentic is besides the point. With that in mind, we review his well-researched book Spent: Sex, Evolution, and Consumer Behavior.
• In the same vein, you may wonder – is buying fake every ethically warranted? Madison explores the problems and benefits of buying into trends.
• If you’re a dedicated online shopper, you want to make sure you’re not getting ripped off by knockoffs. But how? This handy guide to avoiding fakes will steer you in the right direction.
• And as always, check out Seam Ripper for more news and developments on the fakery front.

(Courtesy of Samantha Thavasa)

The feds who track the import of counterfeit goods have their work cut out: During this recessionary economy, when consumers are foraging for deals, fake fashion is enjoying an unprecedented surge in demand.

The New York Times describes how it’s not just high-end purses that are now being knocked off:

“If there is demand, there will be supply,” said John Spink, associate director of the Anti-Counterfeiting and Product Protection Program at Michigan State University. In China, he said, “It’s all of a sudden them saying, ‘We have low capacity. What can we make?’ ”

The answer is increasingly knockoffs of lesser-known brands, which are easy to sell on the Internet, can be priced higher than obvious fakes, and avoid the aggressive programs by the big luxury brands to protect their labels, retail companies and customs enforcement officials say.

The results: Faux Samantha Thavasa bags for $113 and Ed Hardy hoodie sweatshirts for $82.50. And, bizarrely, imitations that are more expensive than the real ones: In 2007, Anya Hindmarch sold canvas totes that said “I’m Not a Plastic Bag” for $15. Now fakes are available on the Web for $99.

The internet has revolutionized the fakery business — especially sites like eBay. Ethical consumers need to be on their guard for deals that are too good to be true on goods that are anything but the real deal.

Two models wear sealskin coats by German designer Bente Houmann Andersson. (Courtesy of NunatsiaqOnline.ca)

The contentious European Union ban on Canadian seal fur has been temporarily suspended, pending a lawsuit filed on behalf of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, a tribal group that represents 53,000 native Canadians who rely on the seal hunt for their livelihoods.

Canada’s CBC News reports:

The proposed EU ban does exempt trade in seal products that come from aboriginal groups, but [ITK president Mary] Simon said the Inuit fear their sales will still plummet when the ban comes into effect.

“When the market collapses, our market collapses with it,” she said. “This has a very direct impact, and therefore, this Inuit exemption, or so-called Inuit exemption, won’t work for us.”

Animal welfare advocates said the temporary court setback ultimately won’t change the fate of the seal hunt.

“The EU court may wish to look more closely at the ban, but the court of public opinion around the world is clear: the seal slaughter is uniquely cruel and no market wants the pelts,” said Dan Mathews of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

“At the end of the day, this is a consumer issue and seal skin has a worse stigma with the public than herpes.”

PETA may be exaggerating about the unanimous rejection of sealskin; recent surveys in China show young, affluent Chinese shoppers are open to it. But then again, the issue isn’t as cut and dried as animal-rights activists would prefer.

For more about the ban’s impact on Inuit communities, read up in our archives.

(Courtesy of WWD.com)

A fur-labeling assembly bill introduced earlier this year passed the California State Senate last week, and is now awaiting Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s signature into law.

Under current federal regulations, if a garment is trimmed with less than $150 worth of fur, the retailer is not required to disclose the materials used. Because of that loophole, clothes containing real fur were often mistaken for faux.

Sponsored by the Humane Society of the United States and supported by the fur industry, this new law would supercede that, requiring clothing labels to disclose the type of fur used on all garments with fur trim.

The bill was authored by Ted Lieu (D-Torrance) and Fiona Ma (D-San Francisco), who told the press:

“Many consumers choose not to buy fur products because they have ethical objections or are allergic to animal fur,” Lieu said in a written statement. “This bill will help consumers get the facts about the contents of these garments.”

Federal law requires that clothing manufacturers label all clothes that contain animal fur only if their value exceeds $150. Supporters of AB1656 say this bill will help shoppers distinguish between real and imitation fur, regardless of the price.

“There is an assumption out there that if a garment isn’t labeled it must be fake – this isn’t always the case,” Ma said in a statement.

This may be the first time that animal-rights activists and the fur industry have ever agreed on anything, but it’s a win-win for both sides: More transparency in garment labeling means consumers can know exactly what they’re buying.

Celebrities like singer Beth Ditto show that style doesn't have a size. (Courtesy of Love Magazine)

In Britain, researchers have learned that four in ten women wear a U.K. size 18 (equal to a U.S. size 14) or larger. And we have to imagine that the data would hold true for Americans as well. Yet in spite of recent development like Marc Jacobs announcing a plus-size line, women of size overwhelmingly feel fashionable choices are extremely scarce in the apparel industry.

Grazia magazine reports:

However, larger women have told researchers Mintel that more still needs to be done. Four in ten women size 18 and over say plus-size clothes tend to be less fashionable.

‘Rising levels of obesity mean that plus-size consumers are increasing and these shoppers are looking for improved choice,’ said Mintel fashion analyst Tamara Sender, ‘Given the numbers of not just plus-size women, but also men, these consumers can no longer be considered a minority or niche sector and retailers need to wake up to the potential of this market.’

If finding fashionable plus-size clothing is hard, ethical plus-size clothing is basically an endangered species. But luckily for our readers of size, it’s not totally extinct. Check out this guide to stylish eco-friendly clothing that comes in size XL and up.

Sacramento stylist Kari Shipman of Juniper James poses in some of her thrift-shop finds. (Courtesy of JuniperJames.WordPress.com)

Look, we love a great deal. But that doesn’t mean we want to compromise our fashion ethics. Is it possible to balance both?

The short answer is yes. Bottom line is: You don’t have to get a second mortgage to support eco-fashion endeavors, and green looks great on you.

But cheap eco-fashion is equal parts great find and big scam. In this issue, we look at both sides of the coin.

• First off: How to do cheap and eco-chic right? This article will get you started.
• Kara, our DIY Doyenne, throws herself into a project of remaking old belts without spending a lot of money or time. It’s the kind of DIY you can do on your way out the door for dinner and a movie. Follow along with her tips here.
• Sometimes it doesn’t pay to be cheap: Plastic shoes and polyester clothing are some of the worst environmental and social offenders. How bad are they? Take a look.
• Fall is a popular time for makeovers, perhaps because the heat finally abates and your makeup will finally stay in place. There are a whole host of great green options for 2010, and we put together this list of our favorite potions and lotions for under $25 a pop.
• Finally, in Seam Ripper there’s always something new to be found by revisiting our top posts on cheap fashion from this very blog. And as always, it’s free to join the discussion in our comments section!

We love it when one good deed leads to another, and following in TOMS Shoes’ charitable footsteps comes the Portland-based 141 Eyewear, a eyeglasses company that donates prescription glasses to people in need.

Kyle Yamaguchi, one of the company’s co-founders, tells us:

The premise behind 141 is simple: For each pair of 141 Eyewear purchased, we give a new pair of glasses to a person in need. No portions of proceeds. No percentages. One Four One.

Our entire line is handcrafted in Japan from the finest plastics and materials; so we aren’t asking our consumers to sacrifice quality or style to make a difference.  I think we do a great job of combining a great fashionable product with a great cause.

Earlier this year, the founders traveled to typhoon-ravaged Taiwan and fitted 200 people for glasses in its first 141 Eyewear Clinic. More clinics are to come, so this is one company worth keeping an eye on.

With the arrival of the phonebook-sized September issues of our favorite magazines, the fall fashion bug has officially bitten.

And after perusing the F/W 2010 lookbook posted by The Battalion Eco Couture on Facebook, we can’t wait to bust out the label’s take on the cozy layers, leggings, and luxe fur trims that are so in style.

Our favorite looks include this dolman-sleeved sweater over leggings and industrial boots, as well as a fur vest over an embellished tee with riding pants and wedges. (The Battalion uses “veggie fur,” but it reminds us of this vintage-inspired getup worn by Emma Watson in her boyfriend’s music video.)

Ever since discovering The Battalion last year, we’ve been continually impressed with how designers Chrys and Linda Wong seamlessly blend style and eco-sensibility in their collections, which focus on organic textiles and expert tailoring.

The designs are urban, not hippie, and we count them as a must-buy for the discerning shopper who wants to do good while staying on-trend.

Swiss luxury jeweler Cartier has filed suit against members-only shopping website HauteLook.com for allegedly selling counterfeit, damaged, and secondhand jewelry bearing the Cartier name.

Cartier reportedly bought five watches from Hautelook to check them for quality, and the inspection resulted in the lawsuit. In it, Cartier says Hautelook never “partnered with Cartier and is not an authorized dealer of Cartier’s merchandise.”

According to Reuters:

HauteLook is “causing immediate and irreparable harm to the Cartier brand and trademark,” Cartier said in its 36-page complaint filed on Tuesday evening in Manhattan federal court.

Cartier claimed that HauteLook has sold used Cartier watches despite maintaining on its website that it “never” sells “secondhand merchandise, ever.”

It also said HauteLook has also sold Cartier goods that were damaged, were shipped in the wrong packaging, or carried defaced authenticity certificates, and sometimes included a Cartier warranty booklet though the warranty did not apply.

Cartier is rumored to be asking for more than $2-million in compensatory damages. At best, this is an “oops” of major proportions; at worst, it’s fraud.